Multi Crew Pilot Licence (MCL)
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There is absolutely no reason why a suitably-trained pilot cannot make a useful crew member with 300 hours or so. The RAF put pilots in the front seat of Tornadoes, and the right seat of C17s and C130Js, with around that number of hours - and those jobs are infinitely more varied and demanding than the average airline job. The major difference is that the pilots concerned have been through a highly specialised selection system, and have undergone several months of leadership training before they've even looked at a technical textbook. With the right sort of reliable and repeatable selection, and adequate pre-flying training (as all the old national airlines have practised for many years), pilots are entirely adequate to begin first-officer duties with low hours.
Scroggs
Scroggs
scroggs - the days of co-piglets arriving on sqns with 300 or so hours are long since gone. Nowadays they only have about 20% of the PIC hours required for a CPL and a total time of around 200 hours at best....
They don't even have Basic Flying Training School experience any more - they go straight from elementary flying training to a short pre-multi engine course, then fly the King Air.
Even though they have been through aptitiude testing, when they get to their Operational Conversion Units, many do indeed struggle. Not due to ability, but lack of experience and training.
This ar$e Microsoft Pilot Licence is not viewed as acceptable by many. Who is supposed to pay for the training - the airline or the 'pilot'?
The French are totally against it - it wouldn't surprise me if they announced that the MPL will not be acceptable for any flights in French airspace.
It would be interesting to see what the pilot unions will have to say about these MPL knob-twiddlers.
Basic VFR CPL plus UK IMC Rating and MEP Class Rating - then do all the 2-person crew stuff and further IF in the type simulator.
They don't even have Basic Flying Training School experience any more - they go straight from elementary flying training to a short pre-multi engine course, then fly the King Air.
Even though they have been through aptitiude testing, when they get to their Operational Conversion Units, many do indeed struggle. Not due to ability, but lack of experience and training.
This ar$e Microsoft Pilot Licence is not viewed as acceptable by many. Who is supposed to pay for the training - the airline or the 'pilot'?
The French are totally against it - it wouldn't surprise me if they announced that the MPL will not be acceptable for any flights in French airspace.
It would be interesting to see what the pilot unions will have to say about these MPL knob-twiddlers.
Basic VFR CPL plus UK IMC Rating and MEP Class Rating - then do all the 2-person crew stuff and further IF in the type simulator.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Tracy Island
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wrong Stuff
I have just started training new cadets and could not agree more, 200 feet, autopilot out, no clue how to get it on the runway.
Line training turns into a bit of a basic PPL lesson on where to look in the flare etc.
On the flip side they learn real fast so maybe more expensive LST training required before they hit the line?
I have just started training new cadets and could not agree more, 200 feet, autopilot out, no clue how to get it on the runway.
Line training turns into a bit of a basic PPL lesson on where to look in the flare etc.
On the flip side they learn real fast so maybe more expensive LST training required before they hit the line?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Probably later this year or 2007
The changes to the UK Lasors document to incorporate the MPL will be in sub-part K.
The licence will enable a pilot who wants to fly an airliner to train in one rather than a light aircraft - they will go direct to rhs missing the light aircraft NDB holds bit etc.. this is currently done single crew and makes up much of the current cost of trainng an 'airline' pilot.
Its modernising the training process away from 6 pack single crew light aircraft into a modern environment
The licence will enable a pilot who wants to fly an airliner to train in one rather than a light aircraft - they will go direct to rhs missing the light aircraft NDB holds bit etc.. this is currently done single crew and makes up much of the current cost of trainng an 'airline' pilot.
Its modernising the training process away from 6 pack single crew light aircraft into a modern environment
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: se asia
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you very much RVR800
However more questions:
1) What is the package to upgrade to ATPL?
2) If on the flying side, there are apparently some savings (Apparently because a Full Motion Simulator hour costs more than one hour of Diesel Engined aircraft and some american guys have presented the end training of the MPL on jet citation!!!), what about the pakage cost for upgrading to the ATPL? (So we have to compare MPL + package)
3) In the past, before the frozen ATPL, in some countries, we have known some First Officer unable to upgrade their CPL/IR in ATPL. This was creating "social cases", and was not a sane situation. With the MPL is it going to start again? It is not very funny to go back to the Ground school after few years of line activity.
4) All the theoretical knowledge of the JAR syllabus is bring back to an "operational level" + the threat error Management, more or less equivalent to the FAA CPL program +TEM + Ground School of the Type Rating: this is what I have picked up from the presentation done. What is your information on this aspect?
5) Even if originally this idea is apparently European (KLM, Lufthansa), I find quite suspect the rush of the American Companies on this new licence (Three companies making a presentation on the topic)? Is it to bar the JAR licence in order to recover some influence in the Training Industry?
Thank you very much, your opinion appreciated
However more questions:
1) What is the package to upgrade to ATPL?
2) If on the flying side, there are apparently some savings (Apparently because a Full Motion Simulator hour costs more than one hour of Diesel Engined aircraft and some american guys have presented the end training of the MPL on jet citation!!!), what about the pakage cost for upgrading to the ATPL? (So we have to compare MPL + package)
3) In the past, before the frozen ATPL, in some countries, we have known some First Officer unable to upgrade their CPL/IR in ATPL. This was creating "social cases", and was not a sane situation. With the MPL is it going to start again? It is not very funny to go back to the Ground school after few years of line activity.
4) All the theoretical knowledge of the JAR syllabus is bring back to an "operational level" + the threat error Management, more or less equivalent to the FAA CPL program +TEM + Ground School of the Type Rating: this is what I have picked up from the presentation done. What is your information on this aspect?
5) Even if originally this idea is apparently European (KLM, Lufthansa), I find quite suspect the rush of the American Companies on this new licence (Three companies making a presentation on the topic)? Is it to bar the JAR licence in order to recover some influence in the Training Industry?
Thank you very much, your opinion appreciated
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: se asia
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And I would like to underline that most of FTOs are unable to invest in a Full Motion Simulator. So the MPL will be done in TRTOs. What about costs of a TRTO compared to a FTO? Not the same staffing, What about the Simulator Instructor salary of a TRTO compared with a FI of a FTO?
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL to ATPL upgrade
Need to meet ATPL experience requirements:
1500 hours as pilot of aeroplanes
Time in FSTD can be considered by Licensing Authority (max 100)
500 hours as PICUS or
250 hours PIC or
70 hours PIC + additional hours PICUS
200 hours X-country, 100 hours PIC or PICUS
(PICUS = Pilot in Command Under Supervision)
There is a route from MPL to CPL as well....
70 hours PIC (or 10 hours PIC, the remainder PICUS)
CPL requirements:
Knowledge
Skill
200 hours flight time (150 if approved training)
CPL X-country, instrument, night requirements
Appropriate instruction for class/type
Need to meet ATPL experience requirements:
1500 hours as pilot of aeroplanes
Time in FSTD can be considered by Licensing Authority (max 100)
500 hours as PICUS or
250 hours PIC or
70 hours PIC + additional hours PICUS
200 hours X-country, 100 hours PIC or PICUS
(PICUS = Pilot in Command Under Supervision)
There is a route from MPL to CPL as well....
70 hours PIC (or 10 hours PIC, the remainder PICUS)
CPL requirements:
Knowledge
Skill
200 hours flight time (150 if approved training)
CPL X-country, instrument, night requirements
Appropriate instruction for class/type
Last edited by RVR800; 3rd Feb 2006 at 09:40.
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: se asia
Posts: 214
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you very much for the infos.
I suppose the CPL knwoledge is also required for ATPL.
In South East Asia, Major Airlines and Governments aim to replace as soon as possible Expat commanders by Nationals... Obviously the MPL is not the fastest way.
Once more RVR800, Thanks
I suppose the CPL knwoledge is also required for ATPL.
In South East Asia, Major Airlines and Governments aim to replace as soon as possible Expat commanders by Nationals... Obviously the MPL is not the fastest way.
Once more RVR800, Thanks
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Age: 36
Posts: 8
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JAA MPL
Hi all,
On 25th March I went to the Flyer Professional Training Exibition, as many of you no doubt went to.
On the front cover of the Flight training newspaper, it stated that JAA are now going to introduce the MPL to replace the ATPL. I am therefore a little concerned about this as will this mean that there will be a big difference between the licenses gained in non JAA countries and thus conversions will involve a lot of extra flying etc, to that at the moment. Also, are the people who have gained a JAA ATPL going to be at an dissadvantage to those with the MPL, as the new license is closer to what the employers are looking for, or will those with a MPL be at a dissadvantage as the license is new and hasnt proved that it is any good. Also, the MPL will only have about 70hours actual flight time, the rest will be done in a sim, and so the employer will want more actual flying before they consider employing anyone.
Has anyone got any more information on this, and any advice?
Cheers,
Pliottom
On 25th March I went to the Flyer Professional Training Exibition, as many of you no doubt went to.
On the front cover of the Flight training newspaper, it stated that JAA are now going to introduce the MPL to replace the ATPL. I am therefore a little concerned about this as will this mean that there will be a big difference between the licenses gained in non JAA countries and thus conversions will involve a lot of extra flying etc, to that at the moment. Also, are the people who have gained a JAA ATPL going to be at an dissadvantage to those with the MPL, as the new license is closer to what the employers are looking for, or will those with a MPL be at a dissadvantage as the license is new and hasnt proved that it is any good. Also, the MPL will only have about 70hours actual flight time, the rest will be done in a sim, and so the employer will want more actual flying before they consider employing anyone.
Has anyone got any more information on this, and any advice?
Cheers,
Pliottom
ECON cruise, LR cruise...
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: MIRSI hold - give or take...
Age: 52
Posts: 568
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nah,
They'll prolly be very happy about the extra sim time vs. the present MCC where people are both expected to learn CRM & struggle with flying a big jet for the first time. Actual flying (in connection with training) helps very little in actual airline transition - we still get 250 hr. guys on the line with loads of "actual flying" in PA28s, but they have difficulties with a) the radio b) scan-flows c) spatial awareness d) energy management. So a) can't get any worse, while b) through d) will improve with simulator use.
So the earlier the better (assuming we are sticking with the concept of 250-hr. guys'n'gals in jets, that is)
Empty
They'll prolly be very happy about the extra sim time vs. the present MCC where people are both expected to learn CRM & struggle with flying a big jet for the first time. Actual flying (in connection with training) helps very little in actual airline transition - we still get 250 hr. guys on the line with loads of "actual flying" in PA28s, but they have difficulties with a) the radio b) scan-flows c) spatial awareness d) energy management. So a) can't get any worse, while b) through d) will improve with simulator use.
So the earlier the better (assuming we are sticking with the concept of 250-hr. guys'n'gals in jets, that is)
Empty
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MPL is more airline ready than fATPL
The fATPL is very useful for flying a light twin with a 6-pack display as single crew in IMC, although strangely the JAA dont allow it for air-taxi until you are more experienced notwithstanding the money you have spend. (700 hrs)
In contrast the MPL will allow you to become immediately productive on course completion in a multi-crew glass cockpit airliner using the multi-crew instrument rating.
The MPL is a co-pilot entry licence. The fATPL is really a CPL and is done on light aircraft so requires more cash spending to get the pilot up to speed.
Is the MPL low-cost that is the question? One supposes some will see it as a revenue stream
And will direct money to airlines rather than to traditional flying schools
In contrast the MPL will allow you to become immediately productive on course completion in a multi-crew glass cockpit airliner using the multi-crew instrument rating.
The MPL is a co-pilot entry licence. The fATPL is really a CPL and is done on light aircraft so requires more cash spending to get the pilot up to speed.
Is the MPL low-cost that is the question? One supposes some will see it as a revenue stream
And will direct money to airlines rather than to traditional flying schools
Last edited by RVR800; 27th Mar 2006 at 14:32.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: in the air
Age: 44
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sounds to me like the MPL is for people who what to get into jets strait away. you only get 70 hours of flying time(of which 10 is pic) the rest is sim time. mite not be to bad for the play station generation which it looks like who it is aimed at. but you'll not do any proper flying.
The syllabus and course for the MPL are as yet still on the drawing board. As the requirements have not been deceided, nobody knows what qualifications will be required to teach for it either.
The probability is that it will cost a lot more and thus only be available through sponsorship. It is primarily being driven by certain airlines who would like to use their existing simulators to train their own pilots.
Traditional FTOs will find it difficult to compete, bearing in mind the cost of a full blown simulator?
Self sponsorship is a huge risk if you don't have an employer ligned up at the end of the course, the skills learned will not stay valid for very long.
The probability is that it will cost a lot more and thus only be available through sponsorship. It is primarily being driven by certain airlines who would like to use their existing simulators to train their own pilots.
Traditional FTOs will find it difficult to compete, bearing in mind the cost of a full blown simulator?
Self sponsorship is a huge risk if you don't have an employer ligned up at the end of the course, the skills learned will not stay valid for very long.
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 955
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
September 2006
This was the date given by the CAA as a start date for MPL training - of course it may be delayed slightly - the first airline co-pilots would graduate late 2007
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Dec 1997
Location: Suffolk UK
Posts: 4,927
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I understand it, the MPL is likely to be adopted by those large carriers that have their own cadet schemes, such as Lufthansa, KLM and Air France. It could also be offered by organisations like CTC who train towards specific airline jobs. It seems unlikely to be offered as a speculative qualification, though I suppose if wannabes demand it, someone will offer it!
There are serious misgivings about the syllabus as it stands, and I believe there is still much work to be done to make the MPL acceptable. Whether it becomes 'live' this year or not, though, it will appear eventually, and it is likely in time to become the primary route to low-hour airline employment.
Scroggs
There are serious misgivings about the syllabus as it stands, and I believe there is still much work to be done to make the MPL acceptable. Whether it becomes 'live' this year or not, though, it will appear eventually, and it is likely in time to become the primary route to low-hour airline employment.
Scroggs
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: EGYD
Posts: 1,073
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So I guess this could be a turning point, if it is going to be so expensive, for wannabes to say no to the escalating cost of training. I guess they have every opportunity to do so and give- but I fear there will always be one person willing to pay the extra money - even though the MPL is pitched at Airline sponsorship only. 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Northumberland
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, what are the differences between the MPL and ATPL/FATPL?
What are the differences in the training?
It kind of seems like they stick u in a sim pretty much the whole time, kind of going straight to the top. So does this mean it bypasses stages, like a "brief" PPL stage, a few hours ME and straight into a MP jet sim?
As you can tell, i'm a little confused about what exactly it is, and how it works, even after reading through the threads and a quick google search.
What are the differences in the training?
It kind of seems like they stick u in a sim pretty much the whole time, kind of going straight to the top. So does this mean it bypasses stages, like a "brief" PPL stage, a few hours ME and straight into a MP jet sim?
As you can tell, i'm a little confused about what exactly it is, and how it works, even after reading through the threads and a quick google search.